Letter: Bias may cloud objectivity

The Rev. Wohlfort (Readers Write Nov. 19, "Another View") made an excellent point with his analogy of "The other is simply wrong and that (other) is dismissed." Obviously both accounts of the Agenda 21 meeting cannot be right. The Rev. Wohlfort’s parting comment in his dissertation was poignant: "Every person, group, movement, religion, government and nation that regards itself as the exclusive possessor of the truth is in varying degrees, a dangerous entity to its larger community."

May I offer Frederick A. Hayer’s "The Fatal Conceit" as a counterpoint. The achievement of the fatal conceit is that it demonstrates just cause why socialism must be refuted rather than dismissed.

Rev. Wohlfort persists in giving validity to anthropocentric climate change and implores our legislators to move forward on climate legislation. He compounds this claim by assigning victim status to the poor as a result of anthropocentric climate change. Please note that Rev. Wohlfort merely used "climate change." The anthropocentric designation is mine, for if it is not anthropocentric, then it must be an act of God. I hesitate to comment on legislation to curb an act of God. Thus just what may be responsible for the victim status of the poor?

That Rev. Wohlfort is troubled by the persons who "boo" and seek to discredit him because he holds a different view regarding Agenda 21. Has it ever remotely occurred to the Reverend to exercise a bit of the curiosity and humility that he is so enamored of?

The Reverend cited Agenda 21 as a document that he is familiar with. He states that he was an advisory member to the Planning Commission of Mathews County and part of the process that developed Mathews County’s Comprehensive Plan. Could it be that the Reverend’s biases are clouding his objectivity?

A cursory review of the Mathews County Comprehensive Plan reveals numerous references to possible see level rise with reference to climate change. The Reverend’s "sustainablist" designation assigned to him by Ms. Stall might have some merit.

The Reverend cites the actions at the forum and the content of the emails as dynamics deeper than the loss of civility. He cites curiosity and humility in their loss, to be illustrative of the insidious and danger that such are greater than the danger imposed by Agenda 21. I beg to differ. Agenda 21 uses the infiated hypersensitivity of the environment as a means to promote greater political control. J. Gary Lawrence, an advisor to then-President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development, said:

"Participating in a U.N. advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy fixated groups and individuals in our society… this segment of our society who fears one world government…through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined the conspiracy… so we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning or smart growth."

I must also point out that in a Gallup survey conducted in the spring of 2010, 48 percent of Americans do not accept the idea of global warming alarmism. That the Mathews County Comprehensive Plan cites such alarmists’ hypotheses as climate change and numerous references to sea level rise gives cause to suspect that those who did the planning believe that this hypothesis is supported by empirical science. Did not Rev. Wohlfort cite his conviction of the reality of climate change and to further reference those who have become its victims? Rev. Wohlfort finds it troubling that others disagree with him, who "boo" and "groan" in "arrogant disgust."

May I welcome the Reverend to the world of political dissent. May I also add that because he and 102 other like-minded sustainablists implored the senators to move forward effective climate legislation, gives an indication of his fatal conceit, that he knows what is best for U.S.

Unfortunately Rev. Wohlfort is unable or unwilling to recognize the threat to property and constitutional law posed by comprehensive land use plans. Private property is the demilitarized zone between liberty and tyranny. Which side is the good Reverend on?